Re: [atlarge-discuss] 006 Name - Timeline and Schedule

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Walter and all stakeholders or other interested parties and members,

  Walter Schmidt wrote:

> Folks -
>
> I need a little help here.
>
> We have hundreds of "members" who receive this list - right?
>
> Our Panel of 11 approves a doable seven-day name-us Timeline and Schedule
> by the vote of 7 For, 0 Against, and 4 who did not cast a vote for or
> against. There was little discussion about how four of our shiny brand-new
> panel decided not to vote either for or against - right?
>
> The schedule was:
>  Day 1 - FRIDAY 23rd AUGUST - DISCUSSION COMMENCES
>  Day 3 - MONDAY 26th AUGUST - Deadline for Panel to agree on...
>  Day 4 - TUESDAY 27th AUGUST - Panel to send a notice to...
>  Day 7 - FRIDAY 30th AUGUST - Panel to ballot the membership... - right?
>
> By the comments of some of us who are more outspoken, we still do not have
> an all inclusive list of names to vote on - right?
>
> The vote mailing-list, in a "compiled, all inclusive, ready to use"
> fashion, has not yet been provide for the panels use - right?
>
> Today is Day 12 (020904) - right?
>
> >From a "fish or cut bait" point of view, while we can agree on what is
> included as fishing, if one of us who are more outspoken should question
> the as-agreed-upon definition, instead of our Panel of 11 working together
> and shutting down the discuss on a matter already decided, we allow more
> time to be spent by fueling the descussion's fires - right?
>
> >From our hundreds of members who receive these mailings, and not just from
> those of us who are more outspoken, there has not been much traffic
> questioning the how-and-why we find ourselves at Day 12 of a doable 7 Day
> schedule, and the steps necessary to fix this situation - right?
>
> But, shouldn't there be...?

 Not much no.  But some discussion on this issue yes.  The problem
stems from some moths ago when deciding how we were going to cast
ballots and decided on the DNSO GA voting system, which several
members advised against.  Now we or the panel again find ourselves
still without our own voting system.  Yet several have been suggested
some time ago.  I have to ask myself, our fellow members, and
especially the new Panel members why this cannot be handled?
Isn't it clear enough by now that without our own good voting
system, we cannot as a democratic body function?

>
>
>
>  --- REgards, walts@dorsai.org Walter C. Schmidt, IT CPA  Blue(.) ---
>  - -   - IDEA -    |                                           ^  ---
>  - -   Associate   |      Online since CompuServe's MicroNET      - -
>  ---    Expert     |                                              ---
>  - -  Expert Zone  |        http://www.dorsai.org/~walts/         ---
>  - - 52 Ken http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/ Sun 57 - -
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de